MSDN and TechNet users are now hammering Microsoft's download servers and getting their hands for the first time on the final Windows 8 build. The various betas have been used and reviewed extensively; what's new in RTM?

The truth is, not a whole lot. The Release Preview was a good representation of what Windows 8 is like to use. Indeed, all the major design and user interface points of Windows 8 have been frozen since the release of the Consumer Preview.

The visible changes are essentially all graphical, and they start fairly early on. We've known since March that Windows 8 would have a tutorial when you first log on, but it hasn't been present in any of the beta builds. It's here in the RTM.

The tutorial is amazingly brief, and there's no obvious way of rewatching it (aside from creating a new user account; the first time that account logs on, it will be shown the tutorial), nor any reminders within the operating system itself of the things the tutorial teaches. The tutorial is also extremely high level. It teaches the fundamental concepts (swipe from the sides if you're a touch user, point to the corners if you're a mouse user) but leaves users on their own when it comes to the finer nuances of the interface. Whether this is really enough—and memorable enough—for a wide range of users, well, we'll just have to wait and see. My instinctive reaction is that it's inadequate.

During setup, the same color combinations for the Metro environment are available as were found in the Release Preview. There's a bunch of tone-on-tone settings, all fairly brightly colored, and a smaller number of options using a bright foreground color against a gray background.

Enlarge/ If you wanted to use your own background image, too bad. These are your options.

The selection of background images for the Start screen has been extended. As in the Release Preview, they're all quite abstract, but there are now some more colorful options for those wanting a bit more pizazz.

The range of images available for the lock screen are new—the default is a stylized rendition of Seattle, with the Space Needle standing prominent.

Enlarge/ Or you can use your own picture for the lock screen, if the built-in ones don't tickle your fancy.

On the Start screen itself, some of the icons have been slightly revised. The Store icon now has a Windows icon on the shopping bag and the whole thing has a different perspective; SkyDrive's icon has lost the "swoosh" going through the clouds. The camera applet now has a purple background whereas before it had a red one.

The old store icon.

Old SkyDrive, with a swoosh.

Now unambiguously a Windows Store.

Swoosh-free SkyDrive.

Release Preview: Big writing, little icon.

New: Big icon, little writing.

The most significant alteration is the way desktop applications are presented. Previously, the tiles for desktop icons were large text, paired with a small icon in the corner. This was annoying, as the text would often get cut off, and the icons were too small to be easily distinguished.

In RTM, the desktop app tiles have been switched around, making them much more similar to Metro app tiles. The application icons are larger and prominent. The text is smaller, but no longer cut off. This is a small change, but a big improvement.

We knew that Microsoft was going to introduce a new theme with the RTM build, and now we can see what that theme is.

Aero Glass, with its curves and its visual effects, is gone. Windows are now square-edged, with no shadows and no translucency. The taskbar is still translucent, but even this is simpler than in Windows 7; it no longer blurs the strip of wallpaper behind the bar.

The color of the window borders and the taskbar is now dynamic, based on the predominant hue of the desktop wallpaper. You can override this dynamic color if you prefer, sticking to a fixed choice.

Enlarge/ Note how the color changes when the background image changes.

Other user interface elements such as checkboxes and radio buttons have similarly been simplified. Checkboxes, for example, are simple squares, instead of the faux-3D recessed dimples in the user interface. Dropdown lists and tabs are flatter, though not completely flat, and scrollbars are simple rectangles. Aside from the window borders and scrollbars, the differences are subtle and may go unnoticed by many.

Gone are the recessed checkboxes and bulging dropdown lists of Windows 7.

During Windows 8's development, one of the things we expressed concerns about was the jarring switch between the Metro look-and-feel and the desktop look and feel. The new theme is Microsoft's attempt to bridge the gap. While it's a step in the right direction (and not unattractive, in my view), I had hoped Microsoft would go further still. The two worlds still look very different, and I'm not sure all the differences are justifiable.

For example, while the automatic colorization based on the wallpaper is cute, colorization based on the Metro-side theme choice would seem more sensible. My Metro world is very purple, because I like the purple background option. My desktop world isn't, because its colors are based on the wallpaper.

Similarly, while those dropdown boxes and so on are flatter than they are in Windows 7, they still have a slight gradient. Their Metro counterparts don't. Differences in font selection and sizing are understandable; changing those things drastically would simply break desktop applications. The aesthetic differences, however, are harder to make sense of.

Microsoft also seems not to have followed through with its flatter, simpler aesthetic. There are still traces of fancier graphical effects such as the "glow" when the mouse is over a taskbar button. So while the new theme means that the desktop is, aesthetically, marginally more consistent with the Metro parts, it's now a little less internally consistent.

The blur effect may be gone, but there's still translucency and the weird glowy lighting effect on the taskbar. It feels very out of place.

Even the installer has a faux-Aero Glass look to it.

Enlarge/ That glass effect is a Windows 7 thing. It has no place in the Windows 8 installer.

Further separating the desktop world from the Metro world are the new desktop wallpapers included with Windows 8. Just as the desktop's color scheme is independent of the Metro world's color scheme, so too are the desktop wallpapers independent of the Start screen background. The default wallpaper is a picture of a flower, and there are two further wallpaper sets available; some landscape photography called "Earth," and some more flowers in a set called "Flowers."

These wallpapers seem chosen almost deliberately to contrast with the Start screen images. On the Metro side, the imagery is abstract, stylized, and fundamentally unreal. On the desktop, it's photographic and natural. Having such a contrast isn't bad per se, but it makes the desktop feel as if Microsoft wasn't really sure which way to go; on the one hand, the new theme is designed to be simpler and in harmony with the "authentically digital" Metro world. On the other hand, the wallpapers are "authentically natural" as it were.

Beyond these visual changes there's not a lot more to see in Windows 8 RTM. If you've used the Release Preview, you've seen it all already.

In the past, the RTM build of a Windows release, the version that gets shipped out to manufacturers and installed on people's PCs, has been a big deal. That's because once the operating system is RTM, it's pretty much done. We already know what applications we're going to use—because we already have them—and the built-in applications are essentially set in stone.

Windows 8 is very different. While part of the draw of the operating system is, of course, the ability to run regular Windows software, just as important is the ability to run a whole new kind of application: finger-friendly, Metro-styled (though we can't call it that any more) software, distributed and updated via the built-in Windows Store.

Even some of the "built-in" applications—including Mail, Music, and Video—are essentially Windows Store applications, and will receive updates though the Store, just like every other app.

As those early adopters will shortly discover, the problem is that the Store is, at the moment, a very barren place. This is no surprise; developers have only just got their hands on the final software and final version of Visual Studio 2012. It will take them some time to get apps finished up, submitted, and approved for distribution.

Over the next few months, the Store should start to become a little more fleshed out. Even the built-in applications might receive updates—although they've been changed a little since the Release Preview, they're still quite rudimentary and in need of improvement.

We're expecting—we're hoping—that Windows 8's retail launch, on October 26th, will come with a big splash and lots of new apps. Apps that will make sense of Microsoft's Metro user interface, that will showcase Windows 8 as a platform that's equally at home on a tablet as it is on a desktop.

Because without those apps, the Windows 8 experience is incomplete. The design decisions Microsoft made have no rationale. We need an app ecosystem to give them context; to see whether Microsoft's vision really plays out when used day-in, day-out, and whether Metro is a productive, fluent environment.

There's also a question of hardware. Many OEMs are preparing to release a range of new machines with better, gesture-supporting trackpads, 10-point multitouch screens, lightweight tablets, and all manner of hybrids, but this "Designed for Windows 8" hardware isn't out yet. Good trackpads with gesture support make a world of difference to the Windows 8 experience, but at the moment, driver and hardware availability is too limited.

As a result of this, we are not reviewing Windows 8 just yet. We will, but our plan is to do so later in the year, timed to coincide with the retail launch of the operating system on October 26th. This will, we hope, give us an opportunity to use Windows 8 with a selection of real Windows 8 applications and real Windows 8 hardware. Until then, Windows 8 is, in a sense, incomplete. The operating system may be done, but the user experience still needs to cook a little longer.

I think the new wallpaper schemes are ugly. The "flat aero" world on the desktop is ugly too. Some of the refinements were needed. However, I think that the interface is still too far away from being "desktop ready."

One more thing: Windows setup user interfaces always seem to be stuck on the previous release's user interface. I expect to see a more "Metro-ized" setup experience in Windows 9.

This is a tick-tock approach to the OS just like Vista was. The move to Vista was relatively jarring from a user standpoint who had XP ingrained into their daily lives for what, like 6 or 7 years. The users bitched and moaned, driver support was spotty at best, but it acted as a bridge to the more polished Windows 7.

I'm guessing Windows 8 will follow the same path, but it will be much more rocky - as in Rocky Mountain levels of rocky. Users will again bitch and moan, it will be louder and longer this time, but hopefully Windows 9 will be a much easier transition due to some previous familiarity and hopefully will be more polished with a better app ecosystem and a more even experience throughout the OS.

btw I'm not dismissing this version of Windows, I plan to pick up 2 copies for $40 each (intro pricing I think) - I just don't know if I'll install them immediately or not.

I still don't understand why Microsoft removed Aero rather than simply disabling Aero by default and allowing users on portable devices to choose between less battery life with better looks or more battery life with a less jazzy look. This is especially frustrating for standard desktop users where power usage isn't generally a concern.

Just installed it on a test box and I like some aspects of it, it looks modern but its ugly in most places. I've been using for about 30 minutes and went back to Windows 7 and Mac ML and they look so much more polished.

Side note, there is no MS Security Essentials for Windows 8 that I can tell. It wanted me to remove it from Windows 7 before upgrading, so I just did a fresh install

The most bizarre part so far for me is that IE in the new interface and IE in the desktop interface are two separate things. If you have something open in one and switch to the other, it's got something else open. I'm sure that's going to drive users nuts.

Who cares really? Yeah, it'd be icing on top if it was more "metro-ish" but I'm not sure I would have really noticed unless someone took the time to point it out. I only installed Vista once on my home machine. I only installed Windows 7 once on my home machine. I'm probably going to buy a Windows 8 PC or tablet so I don't think I'll even see the setup screen except for the Release Preview I did at home.

I'll see the server 2012 setup screen many more times, but that is largely automated after so I don't even really sit there and stare at the screen.

I still don't understand why Microsoft removed Aero rather than simply disabling Aero by default and allowing users on portable devices to choose between less battery life with better looks or more battery life with a less jazzy look. This is especially frustrating for standard desktop users where power usage isn't generally a concern.

Aero decreases power consumption by moving UI rendering to the GPU off the less efficient(for those tasks) CPU. Disabling Aero on a laptop is a way to reduce your battery life.

Win8 also uses hardware accelleration of the UI, but they have divorced it from the 'theme' that Aero represented to users. The UI is still just as accellerated but the effects have been diminished to reflect the new visual style they wanted. Win8's UI should have no difference from Win7's Aero in terms of battery life, aside from any general improvements to the OS that MS has made in that regard.

Windows 8 is great OS overall. Consumers are going to love it, especially because mail, music, video, and applications are finally integrated. The people who I've come in contact with find searching for, and installing software confusing, so I know for sure they'll appreciate this. It definitely don't think they'll notice any of the small changes and nuances the author, myself, or anyone on Ars have discovered. The way I see it is that metro will be for entertainment and the desktop will be for Microsoft Office. If anything I think Microsoft left the desktop environment in-tact for now because they're going to phase it out later; It's just to help bridge the gap for newbies and people just migrating to Windows 8. I can't wait to get my hands on the Windows 8 hardware with some real apps like you mentioned. The experience is going to be amazing!

Just installed it on a test box and I like some aspects of it, it looks modern but its ugly in most places. I've been using for about 30 minutes and went back to Windows 7 and Mac ML and they look so much more polished.

Side note, there is no MS Security Essentials for Windows 8 that I can tell. It wanted me to remove it from Windows 7 before upgrading, so I just did a fresh install

I still don't understand why Microsoft removed Aero rather than simply disabling Aero by default and allowing users on portable devices to choose between less battery life with better looks or more battery life with a less jazzy look. This is especially frustrating for standard desktop users where power usage isn't generally a concern.

It's still the same DWM. Only difference is the theme isn't aero glass .I'm sure that soon somoone will firgure out how to hack windows 8 and add aero right back in

The transparency is still present. I don't know what the big deal is here. There is a slider for it, just like there always has been in windows 7. The edges are square like they were in the Win 7 beta.

My biggest complaint is being able to run Ubuntu without dong any thing special. In win 7 I can just install the desktop environment ( http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop/ ... ase=&bits= ) and select which os during start. In this version I get the os selection at start but Ubuntu does not work. I am also having trouble using Steam. I can't get a single game to load. Its like they blocked steam. I am sure it is an oversight, or at least i hope it is.

I will stick with win 7 for now, but i know in the end i will eventually be force to move up. Maybe i can skip 8 and wait for 9 with all the bugs and oversights worked out.

I have been trying to hold back my comments on the Win8 appearance for quite some time in order to give MS the benefit of releasing the final version. Now that it's here...WTF?!!

The Metro backgrounds look like bad kindergarten artwork and the desktop...now without aero, but still with some transparency, not quite sure what they're doing...has no design or consistency to it. The explorer window looks like an agglomeration of 3 or 4 different OS themes put together. Old Windows, Gnome, some Mac 9 thrown in ... just hideous.

I have been anti-8 for some time due to ideology, workflow, and business model. But now I have a whole new reason to avoid it. I don't want to look at my screen! Ughh!

I thought they were going to 'pretty it up' before the final release. I guess not.

The window border color control lets you go all the way black however the window title text and action buttons is always black, making dark themes impossible to use. Is there a way to change the window title text color?

It truly is an ugly OS. I don't even think it's subjective anymore... I think if you find Win8 attractive then you need to send me some of whatever you're smoking because it's obviously really good stuff!

I'm talking Metro AND desktop here. Metro always looked like something a designer at Fisher Price puked up during an especially vivid LSD-enduced hallucination, but now the desktop too looks like someone looked at some versions of Gnome or KDE from like five years ago and said "yeah, we gotta have us some of that!"

I get the whole "simple is better" mantra. I get the whole "skeuomorphic interfaces are bad" concept. I get the whole "do away with pointless chrome", at least to a degree... but it sure looks to me like MS took all these decent enough ideas and just went to ridiculous extremes with them.

I've been running the preview for a while. It runs good, performance is certainly not a problem for this OS. But fast, smooth-moving crud is still crud. This is a butt-ugly OS that has some serious UX issues on top of it. I HOPE it fails miserably, for the better of human civilization!

I'm not sure I'm going to upgrade. I can get it for free through subscription. But I'm finding it hard to see any benefit. The only one I can think of is performance. My box is an very old dual core with 2gb ram so any peformance juice that I could squeeze out of it would be great. But I'm not sure its worth the interface change. I don't care for Metro style apps. I don't care for touch. The reason I don't care are obvious, my box is desktop and mouse and keyboard are essencial for my usage patterns. NONE of the software I use will make a transition to Metro any time soon. Currently what I use most are Firefox for the web, Steam for games, Visual Studio and Qt Creator and Notepad++ for dev, Inkscape and Paint.net for some dev related image creation. I also ocasionally run some non-steam games. And of course I use Gom player and VLC for some media viewing and the standard windows photo app for photo viewing.Aside from this core applications I don't run much else. That is, I do run other stuff but not frequently. So if everything I run are on the desktop, and are going to continue to be for the next few years, I think the new interface will only get in the way. I'm simply having a hard time seeing how this new interface will be good for powerusers or bussiness users. All I can see is that it will be great for the "facebook generation" kind of people, that is, the people the buy toy computers such as the iPad. I can see that it should be great for those kinda of people, but I'm not sure thats its worth the cost of alienating bussiness and powerusers. Even if powerusers are the minority its them that regular consumers look for when they need advice. All my friends and family call me when they have computer problems or need advice and I'm sure thats how it works for a large percentage of Ars readers. If Microsoft makes something that we don't like, are opnions will create large ripples into the consumer world. But of course we are smart enough to know that even if a product is not apealing to us it could still be a great product for friends and familie.I will still get Windows 8 no matter what when I upgrade my current box, which should happen before the end of the year. But I don't know if I should upgrade my current box, and also I might even rollback my new box to Windows 7 if I feel the Metro is geting in the way instead of helping. Its like Burke Hamblin said, there should be a permanent desktop mode, I'm really displeased with the "shove it up your throat" attitude that Microsoft is taking with Windows 8.

The window border color control lets you go all the way black however the window title text and action buttons is always black, making dark themes impossible to use. Is there a way to change the window title text color?

I find dark themes much easier in the eye for long sessions.

This is awesome. They seem to have removed any access to the old control panel colour picker thing (which is still hanging around in Windows 7) leaving you no real option. Bravo.

It truly is an ugly OS. I don't even think it's subjective anymore... I think if you find Win8 attractive then you need to send me some of whatever you're smoking because it's obviously really good stuff!

I'm talking Metro AND desktop here. Metro always looked like something a designer at Fisher Price puked up during an especially vivid LSD-enduced hallucination, but now the desktop too looks like someone looked at some versions of Gnome or KDE from like five years ago and said "yeah, we gotta have us some of that!"

I get the whole "simple is better" mantra. I get the whole "skeuomorphic interfaces are bad" concept. I get the whole "do away with pointless chrome", at least to a degree... but it sure looks to me like MS took all these decent enough ideas and just went to ridiculous extremes with them.

I've been running the preview for a while. It runs good, performance is certainly not a problem for this OS. But fast, smooth-moving crud is still crud. This is a butt-ugly OS that has some serious UX issues on top of it. I HOPE it fails miserably, for the better of human civilization!

I have been trying to hold back my comments on the Win8 appearance for quite some time in order to give MS the benefit of releasing the final version. Now that it's here...WTF?!!

What..the..HELL..happened in Redmond???

I'm glad it's a PC user saying this because, as a lifelong MacOS user I'd be hammered as a fanboy for saying the same exact things you just did. What...the..HELL...I have a degree in graphic design, and I can tell you that from nothing more than a *graphic design* point of view this is already completely riddled with second-year college mistakes. It's complete shit. beyond that, UX and graphic design are still totally unique concepts. Steve Ballmer will never understand that.

From a UX point of view, it is also complete shit. Metro is a waste of like 80% screen space, fonts too small, fucking monochrome icons for no good reason, layout has no intuition whatsoever. what..the..hell...

Desktop is schizophrenic, doesn't know if its some bullshit concept of "minimal" or some vestigial Win7 bastard child who slept with BeOS from 1996 or something. Or perhaps a chromebook took some acid and got all effed up (in a bad way) and became obsessed with eyedropping the background and adding a random color to the windows for no other reason than "duuuuude it looks cooool"

The developers better make some dazzling shit for this.

Honestly, I have no sympathy for anyone who actually likes these new so-called 'new directions' I hope to god some hackers make a patch so you can reverse all these retard moves by Microsoft and if you're lucky you'll get something that looks and plays like Windows 95. That would actually be pretty rad. That's the sad part. all this horseshit I'm seeing here makes me think of the days spent on AOL 2.7 arguing Mac vs Windows (When macs were pretty but slow as fuck, and PCs were less pretty but fast as fuck and had all the good apps *besides* photoshop) and my conclusion is Windows 95 was pretty fucking fine for an OS if you knew how to use a computer already. Windows 8 is becoming more and more of a joke, for real.